Obama and Boehner 'pretty close' to a deal

President Barack Obama spoke about the fiscal cliff as he took questions from reporters today at the White House in Washington.

WASHINGTON » President Barack Obama says he and Speaker John Boehner are "pretty close" to a grand deal that would avoid a "fiscal cliff," even as talks have ground to a standstill with just days left before broad tax increases and steep spending cuts take effect.

Obama says that in the aftermath of the Newtown, Conn., massacre of school children, the country deserves a compromise by the nation's political leaders. He urged lawmakers to "peel off the partisan war paint" and strike a deal.

Of congressional Republicans, he said: "they keep on finding ways to say no, instead of finding ways to say yes."

Obama spoke to reporters after announcing a broad administration-wide response to Friday's shooting at an elementary school that killed 26 people including 20 first graders.

His comments came shortly after the White House threatened today to veto Boehner's backup plan for averting the "fiscal cliff." Boehner's measure, a so-called Plan B, would block tax increases from being triggered Jan. 1 on everyone but those whose incomes exceed $1 million.

The White House said Boehner's package did not raise enough revenue from the country's top earners, would leave too big a deficit-reduction burden on the middle class and omitted tax breaks used by families and businesses.

"I'd like to get it done before Christmas," Obama said. "There's been a lot of posturing up on Capitol Hill instead of going ahead and getting stuff done, and we've been wasting a lot of time."

Boehner is planning a House vote on his proposal on Thursday, hoping it would raise pressure on President Barack Obama to make concessions as both sides continue reaching for a bipartisan deal on averting the "fiscal cliff." Without an agreement among lawmakers, broad tax increases on nearly all taxpayers and budget-wide spending cuts will be triggered in early January.

Boehner spokesman Brendan Buck said White House opposition to the GOP backup plan "is growing more bizarre and irrational by the day." He said Republicans prefer a deficit-cutting plan that is balanced between tax increases and spending cuts, but Obama has yet to offer such a proposal.

"If Democrats disapprove of this bill, then there is a simple solution: amend it in the Senate and send it back to the House," Buck said in a written statement.

Senior administration officials said there have been no talks advancing the negotiations on a big fiscal cliff deal since Monday, after Boehner called Obama to say he was going to take a Plan B to the House. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the negotiations.

In the absence of a deal with Obama, Boehner's Plan B is attracting support from Republicans eager to cast a vote preventing tax increases on as many people as possible.

Obama's latest offer — focusing tax boosts on incomes above $400,000 — would affect nearly 1.1 million taxpayers. Limiting the tax boosts to income exceeding $1 million would target just 237,000 households, according to the latest Internal Revenue Service figures for 2009.

Allowing a vote on Plan B might increase GOP support for a negotiated compromise with Obama. Some Republicans might feel more comfortable supporting an accord with Obama — which would likely include more tax increases than they want — after being given a chance to vote for Boehner's narrower tax increase on millionaires because it would let them show voters that they preferred a smaller tax boost.

Even so, House GOP leaders are laboring to line up enough support for the backup measure in the face of conservatives reluctant to boost anyone's taxes. Even if it could survive in the House, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has declared it dead in his chamber and now the White House has promised to veto it should it somehow reach Obama's desk.

The backup plan by Boehner would do nothing to head off deep cuts in defense and domestic programs scheduled to begin taking effect in January. And it contains none of the spending reductions that both Obama and Boehner have proposed in their efforts to strike a compromise.

"The speaker is trying to get as much leverage as he can to deal with the president," said Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., describing the pressure Republicans were hoping it would put on the White House. But he added that he wasn't sure the plan was the best way to get that leverage.

"I'm still trying to figure that out," Boustany said.

Others were more supportive. Rep. Patrick Tiberi, R-Ohio, said Plan B would let Republicans vote to protect as many people as possible from tax hikes while leaving Democrats with the blame if it failed.

If the Senate decides not to vote on the House bill or ignores it, "That's not our problem," Tiberi said. "The ball's in Harry Reid's court."

Besides letting tax rates rise only on incomes exceeding $1 million, Boehner's Plan B also would boost the top rate on capital gains and dividends from their current 15 percent to 20 percent for earnings over $1 million, preventing higher increases. It would continue current tax levels on inherited estates — less than Obama wants — and prevent the alternative minimum tax from raising taxes owed by 28 million middle- and upper-class families.

Boehner unveiled his backup plan on Tuesday. He did so even though he and Obama have come tantalizingly close to finding a politically palatable combination of revenue increases and budget savings that could slice around $2 trillion from projected federal deficits over the coming decade.

Both sides say those efforts will continue.

Obama has reduced his demands for tax increases to $1.2 trillion over 10 years, to be imposed on incomes exceeding $400,000 annually. In so doing, the president abandoned his campaign season insistence that he would raise taxes on individuals earning over $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000.

Boehner has boosted his revenue offer to $1 trillion, including raising income tax rates on incomes over $1 million. That is a major concession from the leader of a party that has made opposition to higher rates a fundamental tenet for a quarter century.

"I think it's a mistake for the Republican Party," said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, a leader of House conservatives. "So that's what I think a lot of members are struggling with."

Obama has also departed from his party's orthodoxy by proposing smaller annual cost-of-living increases for Social Security recipients. The new formula for measuring inflation would affect other benefit programs as well and push more people into higher income tax brackets.

The president's embrace of a plan that would over time cut Social Security benefits has aroused outcries from liberal groups that defend programs for the elderly and poor and that generally support Democrats.

"I promise you, seniors and their families will notice" the benefit reductions, said Pamela Tainter-Causey, spokeswoman for the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, one of scores of groups mobilizing opposition to the proposal.

Obama also was pushing for extended unemployment benefits and billions in spending aimed at stimulating the economy.

The president says his plan would cut spending by $1.2 trillion over a decade, including saving $400 billion from health care benefits that could include Medicare for the elderly and Medicaid for the poor.

Boehner wants deeper Medicare savings. And he says Obama is more unbalanced, seeking $1.3 trillion more in taxes and $930 billion in lowered spending.

By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.

Leave a comment

Name:

Comment:

Please login to leave a comment.

Highinthesierraswrote:

Now, the tricky part - do either of them have the leadership skills to get in through both houses? Let's hope Reid is pulling Barry's strings.

on December 19,2012 | 07:36AM

Name:

Comment:

SteveToowrote:

Of congressional Republicans, he said: "they keep on finding ways to say no, instead of finding ways to say yes." The man is so two faced. How many times has he said NO to Republician ideas? When is he going to find a way to say YES?

on December 19,2012 | 07:55AM

Name:

Comment:

Changalangwrote:

Obama just has to hold out and go over the fiscal speed bump and let the Bush tax cuts expire on the second of January before cutting a deal with Speaker B0ner in early January from the ultimate bargaining position of power. We all know it is the Republican's fault, or we ALL will after the main stream media has its way after the 1st paycheck of 2013 shocks the working class. Obama can end the GOP for good. He is probably to nice a guy for that, though.

on December 19,2012 | 08:09AM

Name:

Comment:

hawaiikonewrote:

Don't be too sure. Most middle of the road voters understand that without an effective combination of increased taxes and dramatic spending reductions this nation is on a road to collapse. The "cliff" at least forces us on that path, and although obviously economically devastating for the short term, in the long haul it may mean survival.

on December 19,2012 | 12:02PM

Name:

Comment:

Changalangwrote:

Check the polls. It is already set up. The cliff is a manufactured term. If there is no deal, we don't fall do our fiscal deaths. A deal after the Bush task cuts and sequestration changes the ante for both sides. Dems start from getting everything they want, and the GOP starts from scratch for their agenda items. Even the unemployed military from sequestration will vote "D" in two years because they will be on unemployment, and on a different hook to pay the bills. Re-districting is the only reason B0ner is still there. When he castes his vote, the GOP freshmen won't carry his Plan "B" for 218; it will be cross-over Democrats. That is why the Speaker has been negotiating with himself in the media to a lesser point of retreat with every appearance. Romney should have gone with Rubio. Now, you guys can reap it for a generation. LOL.

on December 19,2012 | 12:43PM

Name:

Comment:

hawaiikonewrote:

Then both you and I have no issue with the impending but non existent "cliff". Perhaps a military draw down will generate more democratic voters, but then Obama will be dealing with the recession caused by those business tax burdens combined with rising Obamacare expenses. All indicators would seem to actually ripen republican chances for some real gains. Truth be told, I hope it all doesn't play out that way, but that's the way I see it.

on December 19,2012 | 05:09PM

Name:

Comment:

Changalangwrote:

Post sequestration and expired tax cuts will have all recipients of their first paycheck calling their Republican Representatives in the House to adopt Obama's tax on 250K plus households, restore domestic spending, AND give Obama a debt limit increase. The post deal rally at the end of January will be double digits. Any deal would make the new tax cuts for the middle class retroactive until January 03. Speaker B0ner will be recalled by his own district constituency if he won't deal with Reid and Obama at the beginning of the year. Obama will be here Friday. If I see him, then I hope the Secret Service will let me give him a high five. Obama is da man. This is how negotiations are done; Chicago style. Obama has the GOP suspended by the short hairs, like an oh so unhappy puppet. LOL. The GOP politics of fear is old news. We the People are inoculated against their lies, deception, and drama. Recessions can be delayed via money printing. Fed Chair Bernanke is on QE infinity and LDP just took over the Bank of Japan again.

on December 19,2012 | 08:19PM

Name:

Comment:

nodaddynotthebeltwrote:

Raising the taxes only on those who make $1 million dollars a year is just simply ridiculous. That is not acceptable. Those who can pay more in taxes should do so. They are simply trying to protect THEMSELVES from a higher tax rate. It is no secret that a lot of these Congressmen bring in high incomes. Just like the way they game the system to allow themselves to be involved in insider trading legally while the population can be put behind bars for years for doing the same thing. They have even gamed the system to allow themselves to receive medical attention at any military hospital for life even though most of them have never served in the military. We need to cut spending but at the same time those who have prospered from the current economic conditions should pay their fair share of the taxes. They are the ones getting the most of the situation we're in. When a billionaire, Warren Buffett, asks to be taxed more that is saying something. Those that own summer homes and other homes around the country and drive several cars can afford to pay more. It's time they paid their share according to their ability to pay.